This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify it underthe terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free SoftwareFoundation, either version 3 of the License, or (at your option) any laterversion.

This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,but WITHOUT ANYWARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR APARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License for more details.

You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along withthis program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.

I have not followed the development of lossyWAV closely. In my understanding it is a kind of pre-processor that takes out some information from the audio file that is unlikely to be heard anyway. After that you can use your favorite lossless encoder to encode the pre-processed WAV and reach better compression.

How does this compare to Wavpack lossy and Optimfrog Dualstream qualitywise? Is it on pair with those or is it superior/inferior? It is my understanding that lossyWAV uses the same concept as Wavpack or Dualstream (correct me if I am wrong).

I have not followed the development of lossyWAV closely. In my understanding it is a kind of pre-processor that takes out some information from the audio file that is unlikely to be heard anyway. After that you can use your favorite lossless encoder to encode the pre-processed WAV and reach better compression.

How does this compare to Wavpack lossy and Optimfrog Dualstream qualitywise? Is it on pair with those or is it superior/inferior? It is my understanding that lossyWAV uses the same concept as Wavpack or Dualstream (correct me if I am wrong).

lossyWAV rounds lower significant bits to zero. This adds white noise to the audio. The level of the added noise has been pre-calculated for each bit removed. The number of bits to remove is determined by processing the results of overlapping FFT analyses of at least 2 different lengths (64 samples and 1024 samples by default). The quality settings take the processed FFT results and make the processor remove more or less bits dependent on internal settings. --quality 5 is generally accepted to be transparent. It should be stated clearly now that lossyWAV is pure variable bitrate: different audio will result in a different lossless encoded bitrate for the same --quality setting (in a similar way that the lossless audio files encoded losslessly may have different bitrates).

I cannot comment on comparison with Wavpack and Optimfrog as to my knowledge no direct comparison has been carried out.

... --quality 5 is generally accepted to be transparent. It should be stated clearly now that lossyWAV is pure variable bitrate: different audio will result in a different lossless encoded bitrate for the same --quality setting (in a similar way that the lossless audio files encoded losslessly may have different bitrates).

I cannot comment on comparison with Wavpack and Optimfrog as to my knowledge no direct comparison has been carried out.

You cannot comment on Wavpack and Optimfrog, yet you claim that --quality 5 of your pre-processor is 'generally accepted to be transparent'. May I ask if any comparison was made to support that claim?